Hague prepares to retreat on EPP

News has reached ConservativeHome in the last few minutes - from two impeccable sources - that William Hague is preparing to abandon David Cameron's commitment to take Tory MEPs out of the EPP. The policy retreat will not, of course, be billed as such. There will still be talk of leaving the EPP in the future but opposition from some Tory MEPs, other continental conservatives and because of the difficulty of forming a new grouping have apparently thwarted David Cameron's ambition to form a new Eurosceptic grouping of MEPs.

Comments

I'm really not too worried about whether or not we are in the EPP but i do think it should primarily be a decision for the MEPs. If the Party feels strongly about it as an issue then Party members can select people to fight the European elections who pledge to support our leaving the EPP, if they don't then that is fair enough.

My main concern is that this has had the press coverage that it has, it seems a totally pointless internal argument that can be of no real benefit. However it is resolved let's hope it is taken off the media's agenda soon.

Unbelievable. Adds fuel to those who say Cameron's a great performer, but a political fake. Of course I don't say that, I'm loyal and I draw the conclusion that there must be dashed good reasons for this betrayal of a commitment. I can't wait to hear them.

If it's true, it will mean the media can say - completely reasonably - Mr Cameron, doesn't this mean we can't believe a word you say? That your promises and commitments mean nothing? Isn't it the same character flaw as you displayed when cycling with your cheauffeur bringing up the rear? Aren't you just like all the other politicians, incapable of authentic leadership?

Disappointing news, but probably inevitable after our potential allies fell out with each other. On the plus side no one outside the party cares in the slightest - a fact that I hope certain elements of the party will take on board. There's no point destroying party unity over such a complete non-issue.

This is not an irrelevent or internal argument that should be left just to self serving MEP's or any of the other bullshit justifications being used by europhiles to keep us in the EPP. Leaving that Euro Federalist grouping was a manifesto commitment on Cameron's behalf and I for one would not have voted for him without it. If this is now abandoned then we can all clearly see where the Tory party is going, can see the true value of our Leader's promises, and will have to ask ourselves serious questions about our continued membership of it. Has Cameron learnt nothing at all from the Major government's self destruction?

TC, do you mean that being in an alliance with politicians whose positions are virtually the opposite of those we profess is "such a complete non-issue"? Then what is the point of politics in the first place?

Unless we hear really good reasons, and my faith in Cameron is such that I do trust they will be forthcoming, we would have to conclude that our leader is nothing but an old-fashioned manipulator. Smooth but weak.

What I'm particularly looking forward to discovering is what we have in common with the EPP. Where is our common cause? After all, Cameron believes in the new politics of openness and honesty, doesn't he? Of doing the right thing. And all that.

What a shame. Apart from this being one of the few bankably right wing promises Cameron has given us, this appears to fly in the face of any Tory talk of renegotiation of our relationship with the EU in such areas as "human rights" and fisheries policy. Even if their weren't suitables - i.e, non-fascists - for a new coalition, the guesture would have mattered more than any practicalities.

In the words of the late Alan Clark: "I'd rather live in a socialist Britain than one ruled by a lot of f*****g foreigners".

I have no real strong views on this issue either way. But if Cameron backs away from this, when it was virtually the only firm commitment he gave in the leadership election, it will risk undermining his credibility in the future. I recall the commitment being 'we will leave the EPP'; not 'if our Czech friends win the election, we will leave the EPP'.

In modern politics, politicians should say what they mean and mean what they say. Particularly when the opposition are calling you a chameleon.

Reminds me of the phrase "don't make promises you can't keep". I support EPP withdrawal but I would have wanted Cameron to win even if he hadn't promised it. I expect Cameron was rather naieve in thinking he could form a new European Party.

Anyway, IDS managed to take us out didn't he? What exactly are the disadvantages of unilateral withdrawal?

And what's wrong with the Eurosceptic Independence/Democracy group? UKIP may be a member but not all parties advocate withdrawal from the EU: http://indemgroup.org/

I suspect Cameron is of similar ilk to Blair in lacking the courage and conviction to take a stand when it comes to matters related to the EU. By proving so weak Cameron risks catastrophe, he will fatally divide the party if he does not take a clear and definitive euro-sceptic stance. We all know Major’s attempt at a magical balancing act between the sensible euro-sceptics and pro-European traitors spectacularly failed.

Conservative MEPs earning a mint for god knows what and elected on a mildly euro-sceptic platform by an electorate that didn’t know their name have little right to obstruct necessary and vital change. This retreat sincerely suggests Cameron cannot be trusted. That said turning to timewasters like UKIP over Europe benefits nobody except LibDem and Labour traitors craving to sign away British sovereignty and join a United States of Europe.

Jack - I'm saying that what matters is winning the next election. Which parties we sit with in the European Parliament does not have any relevance to that goal whatsoever. Let's be clear - I'd prefer us out of the EPP, but the public do not care one way or the other and there's no point having a public brawl over the matter.

I am beginning to find the continued EPP discussions rather tedious. I am as uncomfortable with the EPP as anyone, but at the end of the day the only difference is a bit more money and speaking time at the European Parliament, which will matter not one jot in this country. When we leave, great, but until that point, can we talk about something that people other than Party hacks care about? Please...

As has been said previously, if Cameron backtracks on his two promises during the leadership campiagn (the other being the A list), then our opponents will use it as a stick to beat him with (flip flop, u turn ect). I have a little sympathy with Cameron here as the 2 parties falling out had obviously caused a problem, but he must not cave in on the promise altogether.

One thing Cameron can do, is exert his authority over his MEPs. The MEP leadership is accountable to nobody which is why they can go against the will of the membership and expel MEPs for doing their job. The whip should be in the hands of the shadow foriegn secretary, and MEPs publically criticising the leadership, should have the whip removed. That is the only way he can begin to retain credibility on Europe.

If he does not honour this 'concrete, bankable, cast-iron' pledge, I shall not be able to vote for Built to Last.

As much as I want to see the back of Labour and Blair, I at least want them replaced with a Conservative government that means what it says and will do as it promises. I do not want them replaced by a sham or shallow professing Conservative party which will ultimately damage 'the brand' further.

Reneging on this, for whatever reason, will be affirmation that DC simply 'played to the gallery' to get elected, and is all things to all people - a superficial political opportunist. I hope and pray that this is not true.

With respect TC, I'd rather we had a public brawl about it now - some three or four years before another election - rather than during an election campaign, when you can bet your bottom dollar that November Criminals with influence in the party - Clarke, Heseltine, Hurd etc - will put pressure on Cameron to drop this pledge along with much resembling a eurosceptic agenda. Doubtless the public don't care. But thats no reason to not take a stand on an issue. PR shouldn't take precedence over any potential to regains in national sovereignty - no matter how small or insignificant they may look on paper.

As a previous commenter said, dont make promises you cant keep. Im chuffed to bits about this news. Ive commented on the newslinks page this morning and there we are. As for using it as a stick...Hague shouldnt be worried about this site. Its the wider media, including the broadsheets he should be wary of.

The other contentious issue in the Party, the A-List, is not the way it was to begin with, due to retreats by CCHQ. Camerons attempt to get core voters through Europe is about to collapse. Hes alienated the Right by offering them something that will not materialise. The honeymoon is about to end...

"I am beginning to find the continued EPP discussions rather tedious." Oh are you? Thanks for repeating it from the other page.

"at the end of the day the only difference is a bit more money and speaking time at the European Parliament" Ever heard of hypocrisy, when you ally yourself with people who believe something fundamentally different from you? What happened to the new style of DC? Doesn't honesty, and sticking to commitments (why make the commitment in the first place if it doesn't matter?) matter, Councillor?

"can we talk about something that people other than Party hacks care about?" Yes, you can, somewhere else. This is a site for party hacks who care about European issues, among other things.

A Class A list built to fail at first hurdle followed by a promise broken ---good ammo for UKIP in B&C.
This was always on the cards as they are committed to this years EU/EPP budget and they are snookered ,as the 'acceptable' partners are already in IDD group with UKIP.Looks like musical chairs won't take place manana ,but in 2009.

I'm sorry Iain but this is serious. Cameron made quite a play of withdrawing from the EPP-ED saying words to the effect of "it's important politicians are consistent" It makes Cameron look like a lightweight and untrustworthy. A perfect opportunity for our opponents. This is bad news.

Unfortunately DVA, the £100 bet is one I really hoped that I would lose. I sensed Cameron was not being honest, and I was criticised for doing so, being told, time after time, after time that Cameron would be good for his word.

It won't resonate with most people, but the EPP withdrawal was the only specific pledge that Cameron made as part of his leadership election and one his had repeatedly reassured people that he would deliver on.

Whether you agree with the pledge or not, it was a 100% cast iron pledge. If Cameron can't deliver a pledge that is perfectly within his power to do so, then he cannot be trusted on any issue. This is an issue of trust.

However, always look on the bright side. There is one potential way to rescue the situation, and I think it is the only way; make a better pledge. Now is time for Cameron to pledge to offer us a referendum on the EU with the simple question:

"Do you want the UK to remain a member of the EU?"

Of course Cameron can clearly state that it is his intention to fight for a "yes" vote, but by offering this referendum he will restore trust and offer a policy that will set our path with the EU for the next generation.

"Cameron made quite a play of withdrawing from the EPP-ED saying words to the effect of "it's important politicians are consistent""

Exactly, So, councillor, if I'm going to take you seriously again then at please least face the issues of process. Even if you think European matters are tedious and unimportant, Cameron made it something important AND made consistency important. So how do you defend this?

Iain, I do understand what you say. Discussions on Europe can truly suck the big one, but given the issues importance in the recent history of the Conservative Party, we'd be remissed if it was treated as important. If the rumour is true, and I suspect it is, Camerons about to get a metaphorical punch in the face.

This is just what I thought was going to happen, and just as I thought its due to circumstances outside of DC's control.

We cannot leave the EPP if there is no viable group to join, becoming independents would mean that we'd sacrifice valuable floor time. The reason the european party leadership is never going to be happy is because if they became independents the gravy train comes to a pretty abrupt stop.

Come the next euro elections we may be able to form a better grouping, with parties who's obligations to particular groupings will have ended, its just annoying that this will be seen as such a blow to DC's authority :(

I expect that DC will play this as 'I still want to leave the EPP, but it has proved impossible to form a new grouping for the time being.' I see the trust point here, but I don't think Labour will be able to make much mischief with an issue most of the public are unaware of anyway. The only way this is going to become a major issue is if we start fighting about it.

... or is it answer (C): nothing is more important than Europe. Events and even the most sceptic shadow foreign secretary can't convince me otherwise. No sir! Europe. EPP. PEE. Strasbourg! 400,000% of our laws are made in Brussels every minute. Fmmm. Hmm. Law And Justice are reasonable folks. Yes. Liars! Liars! And PS we're doomed.

"The only way this is going to become a major issue is if we start fighting about it."

No this is a major issue, a major issue of trust. Sure it is about the EPP, but the issue is about reneging on a cast-iron pledge. As simple as that. Cameron made a pledge to get elected as leader. He must deliver that pledge.

I voted for David Cameron based on that pledge. How many other people voted for David Cameron based on that pledge?

This could be seen as winning an election by fraudulent means.

I think members would be in their rights to call for a new election. Of course many will try to play down the significance, but these same people, including the Editor have reassured us time after time over the past six months, that Cameron would be good for his word.

Many people thought Cameron was a closet Europhile, and saw the delivery of this pledge as essential to have any trust in him.

In fact I was reprimanded here by the Editor because I said I thought Cameron was a liar, and had no intention of delivering which led to the £100 bet.

I still hope this is not true, but if I win the £100, that will be confirmation of my original statement of Cameron's honesty.

Having said all this it's good to see the Europhiles stick to their guns and win the day. Being part of the ED is perfectly within our party tradition and gives us the best of all possible worlds. If we do stay within the ED it will be good news for our MEPs but certainly bad news for the wider party.

I voted for David Cameron based on that pledge. How many other people voted for David Cameron based on that pledge?
... and then promptly left the party.

The problem with this situation is that to withdraw from the EPP in our current state with no allies would be suicide, and to remain mmembers would make us flip floppers. I think everyone needs to think for a second and recognise that sometimes flipflops are the right thing to do. I can understand flipflopping criticism when the flop has been planned in advance, but when the promise is going to return rapidly different results to those imagined when the promise was made, I feel its ok for the situation to be reconsidered. Its when you carry on in a bullheaded fashion, refusing ever to change your opinion or plans that mistakes happen... big mistakes.

I must say, I don't think much of the Editor's slant on this issue. If withdrawing from the EPP at the moment is not viable because of the reasons he states, then why be so bloody minded as to insist Cameron gets it done in the immediate future? At the end of the day nobody in the UK is going to change their mind on whether they vote for us based on our EPP policy, not a soul.

Which is more important to us, ideological purity or keeping this party on the right track so that we can save Britain from New Labour? Our party has survived principally because it has always been willing to change its slant on almost every issue, adapting to the demands of the present political climate. Europe may be important, but it isn't to the electorate. Getting into hysterics and having a bust-up over this non-issue is symptomatic of the reason the party has failed to connect with the electorate and win: half the party is self-obsessed! All they do is talk continuously about Conservative Party issues and Conservative Party decisions, rather than looking at the issues which the public cares about, and which will win us respect and votes.

To some up: there is only one person who can beat Brown to the premiership after the next election, and that person is Cameron. We can all agree that this would be an infinitely preferable outcome to another 5 years of Labour incompetence, so it would seem only logical to give him our full support until 2009. If he fails at the next election then so be it, but based on evidence so far he is our best chance of victory yet.

Lets all just calm down a bit, most of the electorate haven't a clue what the EPP is anyway and find anything to do with the EU a total switch off in anycase. If things haven't gone to plan then I'm sure Mr Hague, who has some credibility with the voters, will explain it away without it looking like some sort of disaster for us, which in my opinion it isn't anyway.

Labour are in all sorts of trouble lets just keep the focus on them and hopefully finish them off.

Yes, because I thought Cameron was lying over the EPP pledge and I strongly opposed the positive discrimination. Proof here.

I fully supported Cameron's leadership bid, but a few issues like Roger Helmer's clear statement over what Cameron had said to him about 'immediate' EPP withdrawal began to make me question Cameron's honesty.

Well, it would seem I may well have been a very good judge of character.

The comments above show one thing that the party really as got to stop this obsession about Europe.
This apparant decision is if true a sensible one bearing in mind the apparant difficulites in forming a new group and finding allies that are to put it frankly not completly off the planet.
As for the comment that this is the end of the honeymoon. The party is riding high in the polls and in David Cameron we have not a leader of the opposition but a Prime Minister in waiting so that comment is complete nonsense.
If the right want a fight than I think Cameron should take them on and defeat them.It could be a perfect opportunity to show the wider public who are not so obessed about Europe as most who come on this site are that the party is changing. For the better.

Whilst I am very disappointed to hear this rumour, I think we must wait and see what happens before jumping to hasty conclusions. Tim doesn't appear to have mentioned that William Hague's income is apparently down considerably now that his political responsibilities prevent him appearing on the speaking circuit.

It is not beyond reason to imagine Mr Cameron would sack a Shadow Foreign Secretary who failed to achieve on an important personal manifesto commitment. For all we know, that may be an outcome Mr Hague would relish as it may likely increase his opportunities for speaking at various well-paid pro-Europe events.

I'm with Sally and Iain. Nearly no-one in the country apart from a few right-wing obsessives cares. I would prefer that we weren't in the EPP, but it really isn't a major issue, and unilateral withdrawal without looking at viable coalition partners is only to make for an embarrassing climbdown later on. 99% of the country probably thinks the EPP is a type of pension plan. The idea that people voted in their droves for Cameron just on that pledge and he has some reneged on a fundamental part of his message is faintly risible.

I recognise we have problems with Eastern European countries and it will take time to deliver on this pledge. I can live with that as long as the policy stays on the agenda.

That I have a problem with is rogue unaccountable Europhile MEPs attacking the leadership, and going against the will of the members in their actions. Again, one thing Cameron and Hague can do tomorrow is take control of our MEPs and bring back the whip under Hagues control. This would show real leadership, and I'm sure would pacify those who wanted and expected immediate withdrawal.

Jack Stone - it is not an obsession. It is because Europe matters. It is rather like the people who thought Churchill was a bit mad and obsessed in the 1930's. Until people wake up and realise what the EU is doing to this country it is essential that honest politicians continue to point it out.

Chad, Cameron was stuck from the start on this one and we both know it. I dont think he was lying as that involved a much greater degree of intention to harm than simple misjudgement, which I think was more appropriate. Oh well, we all make mistakes. Im happy for Cameron to abandon this. Its his first good move for a while, I think.

Hi Christina,
I genuinely believe that Cameron had no intention of delivering this pledge. The way that Roger Helmer has been ignored by the leadership and abused by the other MP's (as Andrew pointed out) and the Caroline Jackson has been able to act without the slightest reprimand.

It just didn't tally with the stated policy of EPP withdrawal. Then Roger clearly said that he was told it would be immediate withdrawal, then in his interview with ToryRadio, he said that he hoped it would be by mid-year.

I truly think that Cameron has no intention of delivering this pledge, which is why I was happy to bet £100 that it wouldn't be delivered by 1/1/2007 when everyone else was telling me I was completely wrong.

Henry Cook - what planet are you on? There is nothing offensive in what I posted. Churchill warned of a growing menace to this country and was dismissed as "obsessed and a bit mad", until his warnings were proven correct.

The profoundly undemocratic EU is by stealth intruding into more and more areas of our national life. If people actually new how much of our legislation is made in Europe for us, or enacted by the UK under EU licence they would be horrified.

To continue to ally ourselves with the Federalist EPP would be a travesty of what we claim to support as a party.

"had, Cameron was stuck from the start on this one and we both know it."

Hi James,
I fully understand why party members will want to play this down, for your own electoral purposes. I understand that.

However, no, I had absolutely no knowledge that Cameron was stuck on this. It was a great pledge as it could be delivered in opposition, to build up trust, and his eurosceptic credentials.

Cameron never ever said it was dependent on an election in another country. Roger Helmer has clearly stated that he was told it would be immediate withdrawal.

It actually seemed like a very simple pledge. It was only the non-delivery that started to raise the temperature.

I have tried to be optimistic and suggested that an eu referendum could recover the situation.

I still hope the rumour proves to be false, as when we all feel totally deceived by Blair over the Iraq war, it is vital that we can trust our political leaders to both tell the truth and have the strength to deliver their pledges.

I was just waiting for this from Jack Stone: "This apparant decision is if true a sensible one bearing in mind the apparant difficulites in forming a new group and finding allies that are to put it frankly not completly off the planet."

And Jack, if it turns out the rumour is untrue, then will that also be a "true and sensible" decision?

And I love those commentators who say it doesn't matter because the electorate don't know or care. You have contempt for true leadership, policy and governance.

And why would it be a 'disaster' not to be part of some alliance? Especially if being in the alliance means you support things you don't believe in.

Jack Stone @ 20:38 says: "The comments above show one thing that the party really as got to stop this obsession about Europe."

One man's "obsession", dear Jack, is another man's "concern".

Are you really saying that we should not be concerned about a political construct that is our de facto central government to which Mr Cameron, in many vital policy areas - including "environment" - will be subordinate if he ever gets to head the local government in Westminster?

I'm sure Cameron would like us out of the EPP but events seem to have frustrated his plans. Hardline Eurosceptic though I am I can't bring myself to get wound up about this. Whether we like it nor not the electorate just don't care. I can see why people are frustrated about this but I hardly think Cameron can be blamed for failing to find enough coalition partners for a new party. Let's unite, get ourselves into power and then deal with the European "project".

"Henry - I am comparing Churchill's warnings of a threat to the UK and the treatment of him, with the Euro realist warnings about the impact of the EU. "

This impact will really kick in when it becomes a criminal offence to sell in Imperial measurements. This is so outrageously stupid (and making it a CRIMINAL offence?!) that I can't think of a single decent argument in favour of it.

"your own electoral purposes"... My candidature isnt even close to being based on the EPP promise. I dont know of a single person in the constituency who has brought up the EPP with me or indicated that it would sway their vote. Its a complete non issue. People in the ward I hope to represent are more concerned with domestic affairs...

When does it become a criminal act to sell in imperial measurements? I thought it already was, thus the metric martyrs battle. At least thats what I tell the customers who dare risk the wrath of the EU by asking for a quarter of loose sweets!

The EPP is a smaller aspect of the EU policy. This isnt about EU policy per se but how the Conservatives are represented in the European Parliament...thats why people dont really pay attention. Its an internal matter.

You are not allowed to sell in Imperial. However, you are allowed to display "supplementary indications" - i.e., Imperial measures, but the transaction must still be in metric. In 2010, however, it will become a criminal offence even to display "supplementary indications", whence even showing an Imperial sign will be punishable by a maximum fine of £5000. At that time - unless HMG obtains an extension - the pint of milk and beer will also disappear.

What is the problem in simply leaving the EPP ? The conservative group can either join the IndDem group or sit as independents until a coalition is grown. Europhile MEPs that don't like it surely can be deselected before the next euro-election.
The conservative party needs to adopt a BetterOffOut stance if it is to save the sovereignty of the UK from total extinction. Once having made that decision it would have an unambiguous policy that would suit most of its supporters (and the country) and that policy could then be put to bed. The party can then continue campaigning on all the other issues to win the election.

The problem is that by simply quitting the group without any group to move into, the Conservatives wont have much influence at all. It needs the help of other countries to form a group. Waiting for a coalition might last for a very long time and in the meantime, the Conservatives are on their own.

Also with no strict party line to take on groupings, the MEPs will split, and that will just get messy.

A promise is a promise. We should leave the EPP - even if we sit totally alone - or our integrity, honesty and conviction will mean nothing. It will mean nothing to us, let alone the public. It is better to be alone, and right - than surrounded but wrong. We may be weaker, though the European Parliament isn't strong anyway, but we will be right.

The EU isn't Nazism, but it is still wrong. It is something happening unchecked and uncontrolled, at least by the public anyway, and is a project wrapped in secrecy and spin. It is a project to create a single state, an artificial nation, and this is very wrong indeed "because each state has its own identity, its own history, its own language, its tragedies, triumphs and ambitions” (De Gaulle).

"Our continent has seen successive attempts at unifying it: Caesar, Charlemagne and Napoleon, among others. The aim has been to unify it by force of arms, by the sword. We for our part seek to unify it by the pen. Will the pen succeed where the sword has finally failed? " (Valery Giscard d'Estaing, president of the EU Convention, 29th May 2003).

We see forced unification as wrong, they only see past use of 'force of arms' as the wrong. They object to the means but support the ends; whereas we oppose the means and the ends [a single state]. This is the view of the EU. If Cameron lacks the courage to leave the EPP, how will he stop this?

I very much hope that this rumour is not true.However if it is then I would hope that William being I'm told the most honest man in parliament would consider his position and resign.
Whilst whether our MEPs sit within the EPP-ED or not is not the most important foreign policy issue facing Britain to fail here after making a promise like that would give me absolutely zero confidence in him to do the right thing when more important matters arose.
The issue of the Poles falling out with the Czechs is irrelevant our MEPs should not be in the EPP.Sitting alone would be preferable.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if William Hague back tracked from the promise to leave the EPP. When he was leader of our Party he said at the end of a conference speech "come with me and I will give you back your country" - another empty promise.

The Tory party got us into this mess and there is no prospect of them doing anything but continue to dig us in deeper. Why would anyone with a few brain cells support/ vote for a party that really thinks it's OK that already 70% of our laws come from the European Commission.

As no announcement has been made there is still an opportunity to increase the pressure on David Cameron to carry out this pledge. Better to be alone than sit with people with whom we have little in common.If anyone has not already done so, do sign the petition on the website Adieu-EPP.com

If this is true then Cameron really will be Tony's Tory. This is one of the few things which he actually has control over and if he fails this test it suggests that there is no substance behind the marketing facade. Those of us who are Conservative members will have no other option but to start organising now to try to ensure that none of the MEP's who support the EPP appear on the party lists for the next elections in 2009.

I note that the europhiles that comment here, in particular Jack Stone and Henry Edward-Bancroft, have not replied to the issues raised by Richard North regarding:-

1. the "political construct that is our de facto central government"

2. the fact that "In 2010...it will become a criminal offence even to display "supplementary indications", whence even showing an Imperial sign will be punishable by a maximum fine of £5000. At that time - unless HMG obtains an extension - the pint of milk and beer will also disappear."

Why don't you make the argument that all this is good for Britain and that the Conservative party should warmly embrace it?

Perhaps it's because, if the average person actually understood what was going on, they'd resent it as much as those who are well-informed supporters of the Better Off Out campaign.

It does fuel the belief, among the type of voter who will switch between us, UKIP, and BNP, that we will strike a patriotic pose, but ultimately back down when it comes to standing up to our country's opponents.

"If their sole reason for voting Cameron over Davis was which part of Strasbourg our MEPs sit in, then I'm afraid I don't have an awful lot of sympathy for them..."

I think in most cases it wasn't, but I do think there were a large number of people who quite fancied voting for Cameron, but though he was either an unknown quantity or wettish around the fringe, and this tipped the vote by way of reassurance.